All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>
To: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>,
	torvalds@linux-foundation.org,  linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: ebiederm@xmission.com, willy@infradead.org,
	linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org,  viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk,
	linux-doc@vger.kernel.org,  v9fs-developer@lists.sourceforge.net,
	linux-afs@lists.infradead.org,  cluster-devel@redhat.com,
	ocfs2-devel@oss.oracle.com, linux-mm@kvack.org,
	 akpm@linux-foundation.org, luto@kernel.org,
	bfields@fieldses.org, w@1wt.eu, rostedt@goodmis.org,
	stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] fs: warn about impending deprecation of mandatory locks
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2021 12:06:38 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5c533ef663b9447206754c46afcab65d107dd207.camel@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <0f4f3e65-1d2d-e512-2a6f-d7d63effc479@redhat.com>

On Fri, 2021-08-20 at 17:52 +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 20.08.21 15:57, Jeff Layton wrote:
> > We've had CONFIG_MANDATORY_FILE_LOCKING since 2015 and a lot of distros
> > have disabled it. Warn the stragglers that still use "-o mand" that
> > we'll be dropping support for that mount option.
> > 
> > Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
> > Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>
> > ---
> >   fs/namespace.c | 8 ++++++++
> >   1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
> > 
> > diff --git a/fs/namespace.c b/fs/namespace.c
> > index ab4174a3c802..ffab0bb1e649 100644
> > --- a/fs/namespace.c
> > +++ b/fs/namespace.c
> > @@ -1716,8 +1716,16 @@ static inline bool may_mount(void)
> >   }
> >   
> >   #ifdef	CONFIG_MANDATORY_FILE_LOCKING
> > +static bool warned_mand;
> >   static inline bool may_mandlock(void)
> >   {
> > +	if (!warned_mand) {
> > +		warned_mand = true;
> > +		pr_warn("======================================================\n");
> > +		pr_warn("WARNING: the mand mount option is being deprecated and\n");
> > +		pr_warn("         will be removed in v5.15!\n");
> > +		pr_warn("======================================================\n");
> > +	}
> 
> Is there a reason not to use pr_warn_once() ?
> 
> 

No reason at all. I'll send out a v3 set in a bit with that change.

Thanks!
-- 
Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>



WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>
To: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>,
	torvalds@linux-foundation.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: bfields@fieldses.org, linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org, w@1wt.eu,
	cluster-devel@redhat.com, linux-mm@kvack.org,
	rostedt@goodmis.org, ebiederm@xmission.com, luto@kernel.org,
	v9fs-developer@lists.sourceforge.net,
	linux-afs@lists.infradead.org, ocfs2-devel@oss.oracle.com,
	viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk
Subject: Re: [Ocfs2-devel] [PATCH v2 1/2] fs: warn about impending deprecation of mandatory locks
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2021 12:06:38 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5c533ef663b9447206754c46afcab65d107dd207.camel@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <0f4f3e65-1d2d-e512-2a6f-d7d63effc479@redhat.com>

On Fri, 2021-08-20 at 17:52 +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 20.08.21 15:57, Jeff Layton wrote:
> > We've had CONFIG_MANDATORY_FILE_LOCKING since 2015 and a lot of distros
> > have disabled it. Warn the stragglers that still use "-o mand" that
> > we'll be dropping support for that mount option.
> > 
> > Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
> > Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>
> > ---
> >   fs/namespace.c | 8 ++++++++
> >   1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
> > 
> > diff --git a/fs/namespace.c b/fs/namespace.c
> > index ab4174a3c802..ffab0bb1e649 100644
> > --- a/fs/namespace.c
> > +++ b/fs/namespace.c
> > @@ -1716,8 +1716,16 @@ static inline bool may_mount(void)
> >   }
> >   
> >   #ifdef	CONFIG_MANDATORY_FILE_LOCKING
> > +static bool warned_mand;
> >   static inline bool may_mandlock(void)
> >   {
> > +	if (!warned_mand) {
> > +		warned_mand = true;
> > +		pr_warn("======================================================\n");
> > +		pr_warn("WARNING: the mand mount option is being deprecated and\n");
> > +		pr_warn("         will be removed in v5.15!\n");
> > +		pr_warn("======================================================\n");
> > +	}
> 
> Is there a reason not to use pr_warn_once() ?
> 
> 

No reason at all. I'll send out a v3 set in a bit with that change.

Thanks!
-- 
Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>


_______________________________________________
Ocfs2-devel mailing list
Ocfs2-devel@oss.oracle.com
https://oss.oracle.com/mailman/listinfo/ocfs2-devel

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>
To: cluster-devel.redhat.com
Subject: [Cluster-devel] [PATCH v2 1/2] fs: warn about impending deprecation of mandatory locks
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2021 12:06:38 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5c533ef663b9447206754c46afcab65d107dd207.camel@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <0f4f3e65-1d2d-e512-2a6f-d7d63effc479@redhat.com>

On Fri, 2021-08-20 at 17:52 +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 20.08.21 15:57, Jeff Layton wrote:
> > We've had CONFIG_MANDATORY_FILE_LOCKING since 2015 and a lot of distros
> > have disabled it. Warn the stragglers that still use "-o mand" that
> > we'll be dropping support for that mount option.
> > 
> > Cc: stable at vger.kernel.org
> > Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>
> > ---
> >   fs/namespace.c | 8 ++++++++
> >   1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
> > 
> > diff --git a/fs/namespace.c b/fs/namespace.c
> > index ab4174a3c802..ffab0bb1e649 100644
> > --- a/fs/namespace.c
> > +++ b/fs/namespace.c
> > @@ -1716,8 +1716,16 @@ static inline bool may_mount(void)
> >   }
> >   
> >   #ifdef	CONFIG_MANDATORY_FILE_LOCKING
> > +static bool warned_mand;
> >   static inline bool may_mandlock(void)
> >   {
> > +	if (!warned_mand) {
> > +		warned_mand = true;
> > +		pr_warn("======================================================\n");
> > +		pr_warn("WARNING: the mand mount option is being deprecated and\n");
> > +		pr_warn("         will be removed in v5.15!\n");
> > +		pr_warn("======================================================\n");
> > +	}
> 
> Is there a reason not to use pr_warn_once() ?
> 
> 

No reason at all. I'll send out a v3 set in a bit with that change.

Thanks!
-- 
Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>



  reply	other threads:[~2021-08-20 16:06 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-08-20 13:57 [PATCH v2 0/2] fs: remove support for mandatory locking Jeff Layton
2021-08-20 13:57 ` [Cluster-devel] " Jeff Layton
2021-08-20 13:57 ` [Ocfs2-devel] " Jeff Layton
2021-08-20 13:57 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] fs: warn about impending deprecation of mandatory locks Jeff Layton
2021-08-20 13:57   ` [Cluster-devel] " Jeff Layton
2021-08-20 13:57   ` [Ocfs2-devel] " Jeff Layton
2021-08-20 15:49   ` David Laight
2021-08-20 15:49     ` [Cluster-devel] " David Laight
2021-08-20 15:49     ` David Laight
2021-08-20 15:49     ` [Ocfs2-devel] " David Laight
2021-08-20 15:50     ` Jeff Layton
2021-08-20 15:50       ` [Cluster-devel] " Jeff Layton
2021-08-20 15:50       ` [Ocfs2-devel] " Jeff Layton
2021-08-20 15:50       ` Jeff Layton
2021-08-20 15:52   ` David Hildenbrand
2021-08-20 15:52     ` [Cluster-devel] " David Hildenbrand
2021-08-20 15:52     ` [Ocfs2-devel] " David Hildenbrand
2021-08-20 16:06     ` Jeff Layton [this message]
2021-08-20 16:06       ` [Cluster-devel] " Jeff Layton
2021-08-20 16:06       ` Jeff Layton
2021-08-20 16:06       ` [Ocfs2-devel] " Jeff Layton
2021-08-20 16:08     ` Steven Rostedt
2021-08-20 16:08       ` [Cluster-devel] " Steven Rostedt
2021-08-20 16:08       ` [Ocfs2-devel] " Steven Rostedt
2021-08-20 13:57 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] fs: remove mandatory file locking support Jeff Layton
2021-08-20 13:57   ` [Cluster-devel] " Jeff Layton
2021-08-20 13:57   ` [Ocfs2-devel] " Jeff Layton
2021-08-20 14:09 ` [PATCH v2 0/2] fs: remove support for mandatory locking J. Bruce Fields
2021-08-20 14:09   ` [Cluster-devel] " J. Bruce Fields
2021-08-20 14:09   ` [Ocfs2-devel] " J. Bruce Fields

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=5c533ef663b9447206754c46afcab65d107dd207.camel@kernel.org \
    --to=jlayton@kernel.org \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=bfields@fieldses.org \
    --cc=cluster-devel@redhat.com \
    --cc=david@redhat.com \
    --cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
    --cc=linux-afs@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=luto@kernel.org \
    --cc=ocfs2-devel@oss.oracle.com \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=v9fs-developer@lists.sourceforge.net \
    --cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
    --cc=w@1wt.eu \
    --cc=willy@infradead.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.